General TwinAir Thread (including MPG)

Currently reading:
General TwinAir Thread (including MPG)

Still don't get the whole anti-mpg brigade :p

I drive fast enough to mean that on most days I don't get overtaken but economically enough to please my wallet :) People who drive slowly enough to slow down traffic suck
 
Totally agree that the real improvements will probably be down to developing the correct driving style and I have been experimenting with the eco mode for exactly the reason the D4nny8oy suggests.

However, after a regime of strictly following the change up/down arrows and trying to ignore the urge to change down when the engine seems to really struggle with the gearing I have come to the conclusion that there are more important things to concentrate on.

Although I haven't noticed any improvement in MPG I have noticed a sharp drop in driving satisfaction so from now on fuel consumption will not be my main concern but enjoying the car as a whole.

I'm not sure about your experience, but I have found if you follow the change arrows you can get a bit of vibration through the wheel, which is unwelcome. However go with your instinct and change gear ignoring the arrow and you get a much more fluid, smooth and enjoyable drive.
 
If only many other owners would focus on enjoying the car and forget about squeezing every last mile out of a gallon of fuel! :worship:

At least now you won't have to leave half an hour early to pootle along at 50mph on the motorway with HGV's up your backside and turn up late for work, just to save £5 a month. :D

I think the issue isn't people driving for maximum economy, it's the fact that they can't get anywhere near the claims made by Fiat.

Fiat claim a combined figure of 68.9mpg, owners appear to be struggling to get much over half that figure.

This makes interesting reading too - http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/news/green-motoring/2011-02/500-twinair-economy
 
Last edited:
i look forward to the full fat, double espresso version of TwinAir with 95bhp

the right amount of power with a lighter engine than the 1.4, normal turning circle and better suspension :cool:

that will be the ultimate 500 and may well tempt me to get back into one
 
i look forward to the full fat, double espresso version of TwinAir with 95bhp

the right amount of power with a lighter engine than the 1.4, normal turning circle and better suspension :cool:

that will be the ultimate 500 and may well tempt me to get back into one

and with the DDCT box should be a real flier. (y)

ps. I thought it was 105BHP.
 
wonder what the "real-world" mpg on the 105bhp Twin is going to be :confused:
 
I applaud you Grimwau and D4nny8oy for your fearless posts! I totally agree with you (says woman with Abarth Punto :D) but wait for inevitable outpour of sentiment from the 'mpg' brigade! Umbrellas at the ready!!!:eek:

Mel, my wife might quite possibly be joining you in the Abarth camp, albeit with the 500 version. She went for a test drive today (by herself) and her only criticism, if it could be called that, was that the suspension was a little hard.

However, as the car is on the 17" petals that might explain the harshness. I am going down with her on Saturday and trying one on 16" rubber and if she finds it OK then we will arrange to swap sets of wheels as part of the deal.

Fingers crossed that if everything is OK I will be able to post my third members photos thread with the heading; "Finally satisfied the Missus, ........ again"! Two times out of three won't be too bad, lol.:devil:

Of course we might be banished to a quiet corner of the car park at the next meeting. :cry:


p.s. Apologies to Venters in advance for going off topic.
 
Last edited:
Still don't get the whole anti-mpg brigade :p

I drive fast enough to mean that on most days I don't get overtaken but economically enough to please my wallet :) People who drive slowly enough to slow down traffic suck

I'm not anti-mpg, I'm like you- keep up with the speed of the traffic around me, but I pay attention to what's happening ahead (traffic lights about to change red/ people slowing/ etc) and use the gears to slow whilst keeping the rpm in the over-run shut-off region. I can make it nearly all the way to work without using the brakes! :cry: :D

I think the issue isn't people driving for maximum economy, it's the fact that they can't get anywhere near the claims made by Fiat.

Fiat claim a combined figure of 68.9mpg, owners appear to be struggling to get much over half that figure.

This makes interesting reading too - http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/news/green-motoring/2011-02/500-twinair-economy

The fact is the figure was recorded and signed-off by officials, so it is achievable, it's just upto the owner to drive it in the right way to get the numbers.

The Honestjohn link you posted shows the wildly varying difference between what people/journo's consider to be economical driving, and the resulting figures they get.

Info on the conditions required under which the mpg/co2 tests are conducted- http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/faq/ (note the requirement that the engine is run-in and driven at least 1800 miles before the test is performed). ;)
 
Still don't get the whole anti-mpg brigade :p

I drive fast enough to mean that on most days I don't get overtaken but economically enough to please my wallet :) People who drive slowly enough to slow down traffic suck

I have to agree . I was really intrigued when details of this engine first emerged. I've been looking back at some of the early Fiat technical publicity which promised a lighter engine than the 1.2, with greater torque, bhp and economy..

I'm waiting to learn more about the experiences of the new Twinair owners but even at this stage, it's fair to assume that no amount of engine 'loosening' or intervention by secret ECU protocols, is going to bring this engines mpg up to expectations.

On current evidence, this engine appears to fall short of the mpg being achieved by other manufacturers in this class and probably that achieved by the 1.2 it was meant to replace. Also, there is nothing in the early publicity material to suggest that Fiat would market this engine as a 'premium' product.

I don't buy in to the "characterful, noise, fun" argument either. It doesn't hold water when you are talking about a small engine which fails to deliver even a class standard level of economy. You would be better of buying a car which delivers a level of fun/performance via a larger, less stressed engine.

Road Tax? Ok. Congestion Charge? Ok (if you live in London.) But have Fiat really spent 8 years developing an engine which fails to deliver on the fundamental promise of class leading economy and which sits in the engine range as a niche product? I'm really puzzled by this.
 
use the gears to slow whilst keeping the rpm in the over-run shut-off region. I can make it nearly all the way to work without using the brakes! :cry: :D
;)


Wow! I'm sure you're probably an excellent, safe driver, but I'm amaized that you use the gears to slow a modern car down! All that unnecessary wear on the clutch, gears and engine! The only time to use that technique is in snow, in my opinion. If you took an advanced driving test and did that, you'd fail for sure. "Brakes to slow, gears to go" is what they even preach to learners these days.

I'd probably enjoy the zippiness of the twin air, but I'm sure I'd hate the apparent enhanced engine noise. Modern cars should be smooth and refined. It's been said here that the 1.2 8v engine is eons old now, but it is really smooth at all revs. As a result of constant development, its more refined than many much more recent offerings from other manufacturers. If I changed my 1.2 for a twin air, I'd be cursing the coarseness that I get the impression it displays at certain engine revs.
 
I

I don't buy in to the "characterful, noise, fun" argument either. It doesn't hold water when you are talking about a small engine which fails to deliver even a class standard level of economy. You would be better of buying a car which delivers a level of fun/performance via a larger, less stressed engine.

Dont buy one then....
 
Brilliant! Thanks for that.

Ok, perhaps a little harsh, but to be honest this thread is now filled with at best conjecture and at worst, folks just making things up. This is my first Fiat and I have nothing but praise for the car so far, yes I know the mgp is not great, but I have only put 200 odd miles on. So I will reserve judgement on that bit for some time. And it does not dent my ownership experience in the slightest.
 
Ok, perhaps a little harsh, but to be honest this thread is now filled with at best conjecture and at worst, folks just making things up. This is my first Fiat and I have nothing but praise for the car so far, yes I know the mgp is not great, but I have only put 200 odd miles on. So I will reserve judgement on that bit for some time. And it does not dent my ownership experience in the slightest.

Well said.
I reckon that I'd probably like the car once I'd got used to its characteristics. Also, with time, the mpg would probably improve. Surely when the engine runs-in and the drivers gets used to the engines characteristics, mpg would increase?

Time will tell.
 
Back
Top